On the heels of a Sandy Hook hearing in Hartford, Conn., which featured mixed reactions and emotional outbursts, on Tuesday "Piers Morgan Tonight" invited Neil Heslin back to the program to share his candid reaction and pained perspective.

Having lost his son Jesse during the mass shooting in Newtown, Heslin testified on Monday, expressing his feelings that assault weapons have no place in civilian hands.

Met with shouts insisting that the "Second Amendment shall not be infringed," tonight Heslin clarified his position exclusively to Piers Morgan:

"I'm in favor and I support the Second Amendment, and I'm not in favor of taking anybody's weapons or guns from them," he told the host. "I am in favor, and I do want to push for stricter regulations on certain type of weapons, as I said, like the military style weapons and the assault type of weapons."

Continuing the conversation, the host also welcomed Senator Chris Murphy to add his insight on one of the most divisive issues facing America.
On Tuesday, the Democrat from Connecticut released a document in which he downplayed the political power behind the National Rifle Association, suggesting much of the organization's presumed influence is based on myths.

Saying that he "stand[s] in awe of Neil and frankly of all of the families who've had the courage to come out and speak," Murphy described his interpretation of the Constitution in relation to the gun debate:

"I'm a supporter of the Second Amendment just like Neil is," said the senator. "But Neil and I are supporters of the real Second Amendment, not the imaginary Second Amendment. The Second Amendment has always allowed the people, through their elected leaders, to decide what weapons are reserved for the military and what weapons can be in the hands of private citizens."

soundoff(267 Responses)

robert v

The notion that we can get the these guns out of the hands of "criminals" by passing new laws and mandating that legal law abiding gun owners register their guns which are now going to be considered illegal is the dumbest thing I have heard in a long time. Notice that even though it has been proven that the guns used in the CT murders were hand guns not the AR15 (that Piers is after banning) there is no coverage on it. Who does he think is going to come door to door and collect these weapons? This is not England Mr. Morgan we see what has happened there...How high is the violent crime rate there again and gun murders were up 5%...

Piers Morgan you should leave the USA or removed and faced up your corruction problems in UK. ONLY CNN WILL ALLOW a foreigner to demonized our Country. Mayor and many politicians get police protection..WHY they should be protected and want to take our rights away???? how about if they dont get protection like every other citizen.. in fact the should not get police protection..they are not special. It is wasting tax payers money!!!

Piers Morgan is telling you the truth about yourselves. You have no idea how you are viewed, as a society, by the rest of the world. The greatest danger to your country's stability is the fear that your democratically elected government is somehow going to oppress and do you harm and the only solution to the problem is taking up arms and killing the government. Your ideas are insane. The rest of the world is concerned about the instability being created, in a world power, by those who advocate gun violence to solve problems. I have lived in several countries where guns are owned by its citizens but the mentality of those citizens, with regards to firearms, is totally different to the citizens of the U.S.A. To put it in a nutshell, you guys have a mental problem which is much more serious than firearms. Get a grip! and join the world instead of living in isolation and fear. If you don't change you are doomed as a society worth living in.

according to vics logic, then we should have all this FAKE WAR abroad that kills tons of innocent people daily! right vic? im sure in places out side of media influence the people see america for what it has truly become, a storm trooping, family killing outfit, and if the others wonder about its people at all, its to wonder why they dont put an end to the madness by refusing to pay for anymore of this fake war bs!

hi Robert, It is untrue to say that an AR 15 was not used at Sandy Hook. The officials advise that it was. The misinformation is past it's use by date. no one is believing the denials and you just lost all credibility.
UK have violent crime, same as USA has violent crime. violent crimes in USA much more frequently end up with a dead person or people.
In intelligent debates when stats are quoted sources are provided so the validity of the stats can be verified.

I was wathcing them pull it out of the car while it was unfolding. That morning while tv was shooting everything, they showed the cops pull one from the car. There was no record of 2 so as far as I am concerned there are issues with that

Hi David, do you believe that watching a small part of the events on tv makes you qualified to refute the officials? This is the from official police spokesperson Lt Paul Vance -a Bushmaster AR-15 assault type weapon was used against most of Lanza’s victims. That weapon had high capacity magazines. In addition to that, Lanza had in his possession Glock 10 mm and Sig Sauer 9 mm. All weapons had multiple magazines and additional ammunition. The fourth weapon recovered was from the suspect’s vehicle that was parked outside of the school.

Reply for CR, you sometimes get your countries mixed up. Is that the UK or the Ukraine?
UK has violent crime but not as many people die as a result as USA. Violent crime stats include assaults and measure them equally. Do you think a gun related death is equal to a slap in the face?

Hi Ros, no I am not getting my countries mixed up. I have never said the homicide rate in the UK is higher than the US. But what I have said, is that the homicide rate in the UK, despite having a virtual gun ban, is higher than many of its large gun owning Western European neighbors. My point being that many of Britain's large gun owning neighbors have some of the lowest homicide rates on the planet.

Hi CR, I'm not sure how the overall homicide figure is even relevant to the America's huge problem with firearm related death. your words 'higher than many of it's gun owning neighbors' isn't specific. UK rate is higher than some of it's neighbours and and lower than some. Overall UK rate is a long way below the European average and a long long way below the USA rate.

Ros, it was Piers' associates in the British media who exposed that the Labor government had been under reporting the violent crime figures. Between 1998 and 2008 British hospitals saw 50% increase in the number of violent crime victims.

And the point of my argument Ros, is that Piers had been using the UK (aka Britain, just in case you think I am getting confused with Ukraine) as an example of where strict gun laws work. While the UK (not the Ukraine) has a low gun murder rate because of its virtual gun ban, it's violent crime rate, as we have just been discussing, is one of the highest in the western World, and its per capita total murder rate is one of the highest in Western Europe.

Hi CR, what is relevant out of your stats is that one very clear and relevant stat which we both agree that the UK has a low firearm related death rate due to gun bans.
A slap in the face is classed as a violent crime ie assault and included in violent crime stats and counted the same as a murder. In some countries verbal abuse, verbal intimidation, violently intimidating gestures are classed as assault and included in violent crime stats.
Would you prefer it if someone yelled at you I'm going to kill you or killed you? Do you get this?
It is so obvious . You are just shooting yourself in the foot if you continue but, off you go:

The truth about the UK is that the murder rate has always been low, before and after their bans. They actually had a spike in murders after the last ban was put into place.

http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2012_12_16_archive.html

If anything causes more murder in the US, it would be our large, overcrowded cities and the poverty within those cities. As those cities became more violent, they started passing stronger and stronger gun laws. The criminal element could care less about laws, but the law-abiding citizens would be easier prey for them because law-abiding citizens would honor the gun laws.

Reply for CR and Jim. I am living in denial that your statistics give relevant info re firearm related deaths but I'll refute them anyway. "there has been a fall of 19 per cent in homicides since 2001/02, as measured by The Homicide Index in the British Crime Survey.

@ros, while that drop in homicides might be the case, the UK's (not the Ukraine's) homicide rate, despite its virtual gun ban, is still 40% higher than many of its large gun owning Western European neighbors. The Swiss privately own nearly 8 times as many firearms as the British, many of which are automatic assault rifles, and the Germans and French own nearly 5 times as many. Furthermore the Italians and Spanish, two other large gun owning European nations, own significantly more firearms than the British and have per capita homicides rates that are nearly 20% lower.

@ros, in terms of Britain's homicide rate, it depends on where you base those numbers from as to whether you can claim there has been a drop or not in the homicide rate. If you take the numbers for the 70s or even 80s for that matter (excluding Nothern Ireland) Britain's homicide rate has actually increased by about 15%.

Hi CR, and is it not the case that there are many other variables between those countries which predate and outweigh UK gun laws? Eg political, cultural. In order to hypothesize that any differences to overall homicide rates relate to UK gun laws you would at least need to compare stats historically. Now off you go and gather some more stats. Try to make them relevant. Eg firearm related deaths including suicide.

It is simply untrue, NBC has already gone mainstream to admit that the AR-15 was NOT used in the "attack" further more they stated that Four handguns were used. Also You would be completely oblivious to what led to WWII... Hitler did infact attack not only his own unarmed citizens but citizens of other nations. You or anyone else comes for my weapons of choice, you will find out just exactly what should have happened to Hitler and his Nazi's..

So what's YOUR solution to preventing another massacre? Just turn your head and pretend that 26 innocent lives weren't destroyed? Or Aurora Colorado? Or Virginia Tech? Or Columbine? And on and on these mass shootings continue.... WHAT'S YOUR SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM????

The solution is simple. Allow adults the choice of being able to defend themselves via conceal carry. Every single one of the "incidents" could have easily been avoided or at least minimalized had an adult been allowed to conceal carry to confront the criminal. But this insistence that we plow headlong into policies that have shown no effectiveness in its intended goals demonstrates insanity and its why Gun Control has never been about Guns but about Control and who gets to have control... Its infringements like this on our second amendment rights that allowed for all these adults and children to be defenseless and slaughtered.. Blood is on your hands Im not afraid to say.

I see all you NRA nut jobs are still believing the load of crap dished out by the NRA leadership. Stop hugging your guns. What is wrong with you people? We are the laughing stock of the world. You call yourself free, but live in such fear that you want to walk around with guns. Living in fear is not being free. I know, all those imaginary rogue groups or the big bad government is going to attack you. It sure sounds like when we talk about the mentally ill and guns, that the illness is we think we need to walk around with guns. Or, is it that the only way you can prove your manliness is to have a gun? Me, I am a man and don't need a gun to prove it. But I guess you are less of a man, and need that.

The NRA doesn't drive the beliefs of its supporters anymore than Planned Parenthood drives the beliefs of their supporters. The NRA is supported by people who believe in the same things that the NRA believes. No one is necessarily in complete lockstep with the groups they support, but they do agree on enough to support them with membership.

People who own guns do not live in fear any more than people who own fire extinguishers. Guns, like fire extinguishers, are a tool that you hope you never need to use for its intended purpose, but it's better that you have it than not. I don't expect to ever need to use my fire extinguisher because I'm not reckless with things that can start fires. I don't expect to ever need to use my guns to fight of a tyrannical government, but since the government continues to do things that tyrannical governments do, such as warrantless wiretaps, rendition, torture, indefinite detention, ignoring court rulings, and yes, trying to limit our 2nd amendment rights, it reinforces my belief that the US government is just as capable of becoming a tyranny as any other past tyranny. The fact that we're armed diminishes the likelihood that it will become tyrannical, and as long as the government doesn't interfere with that right, it's more clear that our government is governing with the consent of the people.

I am very disappointed in the way he has handled the debate about gun control. If the guest doesn't agree with him, he cuts them off before they finish talking and he puts words in their mouth painting them as the bad guy... We cant have a intelligent discussion about the issues if both parties cant speak there mind freely and without interruption. Piers is not an American citizen, there for he is not an authority on these issues and should not be hosting this debate on gun control.

CNN should not have this man pushing for what he believes... He's not American so he cant fully understand our issues with gun reform here in America. I am for gun reform but I want to hear both sides with him not interrupting and cutting off the side he doesn't like..
Either the producers are allowing this because its good for ratings or he has full control of his show.. I am asking CNN to stop this madness... I watch CNN all day everyday and the network is great except for his show. However Piers has got to go.. He's a child.

Lets have an intelligent debate and hear both sides of the issues so we can together come up with the solutions for gun reform... Piers is a fool. CNN should let him go...

AT least PIERS MORGAN has got the cajones - (that's Italian for "meatballs") to stand up for the 20 murdered children and 6 murdered women in Newtown.... What are YOU doing about this gun violence problem????? WHAT ARE YOUR SOLUTIONS TO THIS PROBLEM????? At least this Brit is standing up to what's morally right and not turning his back and pretending 20 6 yr. olds weren't murdered like the rest of you COWARDS, GUTLESS WONDERS! YOU CALL YOURSELVES AMERICANS? Our founding fathers would be turning in their graves if they read your responses! COWARDS AND DEGENERATES who couldn't care less when innocent children are slaughtered!!!!! DON'T CALL YOURSELVES AMERICANS AS YOU DISGRACE THIS COUNTRY AND OUR FLAG!!!! Our Founding Fathers wouldn't be turning away from innocent children and women who were slaughtered and neither is Piers Morgan..... You forget your history? In the Boston Massacre 5 grown adult men were killed and that helped start a Revolutionary War.... Peirs is more American than any of you fools posting here! And may I remind you that the Founding Fathers were in fact (FROM BRITAIN....) In fact, why don't you leave this country and create chaos and division in some other country? America doesn't need anymore ignorant asses; it's got plenty already!. American deserves better than ignorant, uneducated Neaderthals grunting about their guns!!!

You have hit the nail squarely on the head!! The citizens of the U.S.A. have created a monster disease. I call it "Bullet Brain Syndrome". It's a disease which has been allowed to run rampant with no thought of prevention and now you are desperate for a cure. Unfortunately! there is no cure for it. But, there is a way to contain the spread of the disease and that is through tough and severely enforced common sense laws and education on how to prevent this disease from spreading. It will mean educating children, about the "Bullet Brain Syndrome", so that the next generation will eventually have this disease under control in their hearts and minds. It's a sad day for the GOOD people in the U.S.A. But it can be changed. You need to just DO IT NOW. Take heart, take courage, IT CAN BE DONE.

What's to understand? 20 6 yr. olds were massacred.... 6 defenseless women were murdered trying to protect "THEIR" children.... What part of that equation don't you get????? Columbine. Virginia Tech. Aurora.... You've forgotten these other mass shootings? What's to understand about that? It's you gun degenerates that helped flood this country with weapons of mass destruction! You so called "innocent gun owners" who are really gun traffickers & gun runners (straw men) have the blood of children on your hands. And those of you who LET these lack of restrictions on gun manufacturers are just as guilty sure as if you pulled that trigger in Newtown! You're the idiots that want EVERYONE to have as many weapons as possible with no restrictions!!!! YOU have the blood of innocent children on your hands!!!! Not Piers Morgan!

Piers, you tried to draw Mr. Heslin into condemning the responses of those who spoke of their "right to the second amendment" and you disdained their sentiments in the light of his grief. Too bad you don't have the same disdain for those who condone the gruesome killing of preborn babies under the guise of their "right to choose," out of grief for these little lives. Even more "repulsive."

It is amazing how liberals get worked up about guns and the death that results from the lunatics who pull the triggers, but these same liberals see no problem with killing millions of babies via abortion. Could be why our culture has become de-sensitized to violence and killing. After all, if the government says it's OK to murder your baby, what's wrong with killing others as well.

Abortion is not killing a baby. By all the statutes and by all the laws that America stands by, abortion is not murder. Scientists do not even think that life begins at conception, its time people like you stop fighting our government and instead get behind it.

A fraction of one percent of the people who exercise their second amendment right take a life. 100 percent of the people who exercise their right to choose an abortion take a life. Let's fight the REAL battle here instead of a perceived one.

Dylan, have you ever seen a sonogram? Do you know when the human heart starts to beat in that tiny body? 23 days after conception. Is it a human being ? YES Will abortion stop this humans life? YES Then why can't we see that this is murder?

If men want to complain about abortion, they should be held legally responsible for their child's life: financially, emotionally, spiritually, physically, etc..... Too bad millions of men turn tail and run away from their responsibilities to their children and leave the woman & children to fend for themselves....the millions of fatherless children in this country are directly responsible for society's ills. What the hell was the Newtown shooter's father in all of this? Why don't we have answers from the father and surviving brother of the shooter? Father-less children create society's ills; fatherless children create gangs, illegal drugs, addictions, alcohol addictions, domestic violence, etc..... Where are all those men who don't man the frig up????? (Probably playing with their guns at target practice instead of fulfilling their duties as fathers....)

Sorry to hear about your man problem but it does take two in this situation which I am sure there is no argument. Is it you hate men or guns or is it all the same . I suggest you talk this over with a councilor and work this through. And really in your case I don't think you are capable of safely owning a weapon.

Mr Heslin looks like a broken man, my heart goes out to him. please Mr Piers dont give up on this so and make it someone elses problem. I cannot believe how everyone hates your nationality its pretty sad, its great this discussion is still continuning, I agree when the discussion first started there was a lot of emotion at the beginning with the debating because he was angry we were all angry on how easy it is for somone to go on a massive killing spree but since the weeks have past the debating has got better. The silly comments of banning cars and alcohol just shows how closed minded the US regarding their guns, the difference with cars and guns, I have heard no one goes on a killing spree with a car , anyone who is killed by a car it is usually an accident but with a gun its just plain murder.

It was disgusting how Piers Morgan used Mr. Heslin as a pawn to advance his political goals. It was also sickening to see the way Mr. Morgan tried to paint gun rights supporters as rude because they answered a question asked of them. Mr. Heslin asked what appeared to be a rhetorical question and then when no one broke the silence because they weren't supposed to, Mr. Heslin unfairly tried to conclude that a lack of response meant that everyone agreed with him. That's the point when people spoke up.

Mr. Morgan's attempt to put words into the mouth of the Milwaukee sheriff was also amazingly absurd. The sheriff just told the people in his jurisdiction the truth. If you call 911, it will take the police a long time to get there. You can either choose to be a victim while you wait, or be prepared to defend yourself. He suggested that a gun would be the most effective way to do that. It's rare that the police will be right there when you need them. The only thing you can count on when you are confronting a criminal is your own presence. What you do with your presence will determine the outcome. You can either depend on the good will of the person that just broke into your house, hide somewhere, or fight the SOB.

On July 16th, 2003 an elderly man drove his Buick through a farmers market in Santa Monica, CA. He killed 9 people, including a 3 year-old girl and injured 56 people. The police correctly tried to determine his mental state at the time. They didn't call for the banning of Buicks. It's odd that people have no problem sharing the road with people driving 2 ton vehicles at 70 mph, but totally distrust those same people from owning a gun. There are more vehicular homicides each year than there are homicides committed by guns. There are 250 million passenger vehicles that are registered and over 300 million guns. One must take courses and pass a road and written test to receive a drivers license to operate a vehicle on our highways. The gun owners who are not required to take a test to own a gun and who do not need to register their firearms kill fewer people than those licensed drivers. Cars and guns are used by law-abiding citizens every day without incident, but the car that is not designed to be a weapon is a more successful killing machine than the gun which is designed to be a weapon.

Mr. Morgan, machine guns are not banned in the United States. There are many people who own them. You just need to pay a tax and register with the FBI. It's true that someone can't own a machine gun made after 1986, but that just drives the price up so only wealthy people can afford to buy one. This is just another example of the growing gap between the wealthy and the middle class.

hey dummy the difference between a drunk driver and gun murders is none.why because both are the prime example of neglegent use of both items,resulting in the death of a person or persons.so wake up and make intelligent comments,if that is your intention.because you sound just as stupid as piers morgan.

NOBODY on this blog wants to see another newtown or anything like that ever happen again, but we are not going to get on here and cheer on some bafoon from britian as if he has the holy grail of answers for american society. Banning ar-15s and restricting what ever someone decides is a so called assault weapon will not change anything, how do we know this , it has been done before and didnt change anything, until we come up with something that will thru meaningfull conversation , the best move for the short term is real security at all schools, they need to be protected. then intelligent people need to sit down and come up with real ideas , cheering for piers morgan is not one of them.

Where are these intelligent people??? It seems no one can make any real ideas on this issue, is there anyone behind the wheel?. Mr Piers is continuing the discussion and this should be applauded, sure it might not be the right direction at times but he is on the road, these type of news falls unto the background and soon it is out of sight out of mind until the next mass murder which is happening more often than ever, we owe it to these children that there lives were not lost for no reason and we want to make a change, Mr Piers should be applauded he hasnt made this someone elses problem, we might not like what he says because we all know this type of truth hurts this is why there is so much hate towards him

I certainly applaud and appreciate Piers for maintaining sensible attention to the need to restrict the sale of military style weapons and high capacity magazines designed for these weapons. These weapons far exceed the reasonable need for sport, hunting and self protection. Increasing their numbers will not increase public safety. This argument is as unrealistic as stating that the world will be a safer place, once all countries have nuclear weapons, . To the often stated argument that our time and efforts would be more productive if invested into addressing mental illness, I say we should begin by addressing the mentally ill that are so paranoid that they feel they they must have a military assault weapon to protect themselves from their surrounding community, their country and the world. To those who advocate placing more guns in schools (A suggestion I find totally unacceptable), let's face it, that security personnel would almost never be in the right place at the right time, so if one wanted to truly have every possibility covered the logical extension of this argument would be to train and arm every student, K through 12, that is capable of raising a gun and pulling the trigger. Hopefully, no one sees this as a possible solution, but the thought that the solution to gun violence is more guns leads ultimately to this possibility.

Tim, have you ever considered that mass shootings always seem to occur where it is reasonable for the perpetrator to think he will not encounter armed resistance? If I'm a criminal/nutjob, I love the idea of more gun laws because it makes my job easier and safer.

And lets put the Sandy Hook blame where it belongs. Why didn't mommy have those guns properly locked up where her mentally challenged son couldn't get them? Probably more of that "my little baby would never do that" crap. Too bad we will never know.

Doany of you understand the difference between law abiding citizen and criminal? A criminal commits a crime so you go after the law abiding citizen? Gun crime in this country is mainly crimenal on criminal secondly it is criminal on law abiding citizen. So let's see to stop the criminal take the legal law abiding citizens guns away. Sounds like stupid liberal logic to me. Also think of the NRA as a Rights group as they are protecting my rights against people like you who would take them away. Enjoy

The Swiss have guns all over the place, and don't have these mass shootings. So what is different about their culture versus ours that causes these crazy young men to kill in America?
We have strict gun laws in Chicago, and it is murder city.

The Swiss on a per capita basis are the 3rd largest gun owning nation on the planet and have one of the lowest homicides rates in the world. It's interesting to see when we compare Piers' own country, and his much used and referenced poster candidate for strict gun control laws, that Britain's per capita homicide rate, despite having virtual gun ban, is nearly 40% higher than Switzerland's. Furthermore, what's interesting about Switzerland is that most of the guns people have in their homes are military assault rifles.

Are you seriously using the Sweden argument? Up until 2010, everyone living in Sweden was drafted into the military when they came of age. The reason that the majority of people own assault rifles, are because they are given these guns when they are in the armed forces, and keep them when they leave. If you would really like the US to be more like Sweden, then are you saying that you would like everyone to be forced into military service? Your Sweden arguments are erroneous and invalid.

Reply for CR.
LOL, roll on floor laughing. You do realize that Switzerland and Sweden are 2 different countries don't you. No, I don't think so. OMG . I know they both start with SW it's so confusing. Perhaps if all the guns names started with SW you wouldn't be able to tell the difference too. I recommend we rename the AR15 the SW 15.

In this segment it was annoying to say the least to hear Mr Morgan denigrate how the Milwaukee Co Sheriff Clarke's voice sounds in his public service message emploring citizens to be proactive in their own defense when life is on the line and police can't respond in time (seconds to minutes) to save you from attack/home invasion etc. I think Mr Morgan is clearly racist, criticizing the sound and resonance of this man's voice, who is black. Morgan should apologize immediately to the Sheriff and the black community as well, right now. I haven't heard Morgan equally attack the sound of white men's voices so he must be racist. Anyway the Sheriff held his own nicely, stayed calm under Morgan's desperate angry attacks on him and refused to be bullied. Much more professional demeanor than Morgan could maintain . Morgan couldn't shake him up even ganging up with the incompetent assistance of the dimwit Milwaukee mayor Barrett who babbled about everybody needing to have background checks to buy guns – and Morgan then parroting that to the Sheriff, "do you demand background checks for everybody who wants to buy a gun?!!)....which had nothing to do with the Sheriff's message and the original topic about a citizen's need and right to self defence of their life. The Sheriff's message is simply you can deide if you want to be active in saving your own hide (or family's) if it ever comes to that.....Morgan's race based attack and Barrett's failed sideshow did nothing to divert away from that message.....also remember Barrett is prostrate to the will of Bloomberg and must tow his party line on guns.....which is why Barrett screamed patheticallyfor the Sheriff to agree to demand more gun laws..what an amateurish "interview", ugh. But the Sheriff was amazing and composed. Too bad he couldn't have a more qualified interviewer.

Perhaps we should release the pictures of the children with 3- 11 bullets in their tiny bodies. I remember that it was the photographs of what was happening in the Vietnam War tht turned Americans against that war. So, perhaps we should show Americans what these weapons actually do!

OK and lets show the victims of drunk drivers. Their mangled bodies. The point being its against the law to drink and drive and yet it happens . Banning a gun is not going to stop these crazies just like it won't stop any criminal. They will find a way to get the gun. ie steal, etc. The AR was not used in the Sandy Hook Massacre. Piers needs to do his research before throwing lies out there.

Piers , I don't like you.. We need more people like the sheriff. Do you honestly think the police are just around the corner when a crime is committed. In a big city like Milwaukee I'm sure the response time can get alittle long therefore to arm yourself would be best. You badger and cut off your guests who do not agree with your beliefs. God forbid you ever have to call for help. Maybe you can hide under the bed.

America has become a Country to be ashamed of. The lack of sympathy that Neil who is heartbroken over the loss of his only family member received proves it. Americans lack respect for humanity, however highly respects money. My heartfelt sympathy goes to Neil for the loss of his son and for all the insensitive cruel Americans.

Are you reffering to the mean people who "heckled" him? Watch the full video and see how it actually went down. He went on for 17 minutes about gun control and only after he asked repeatedly and look around the room asking for some one to respond did some one say what they said. NO ONE heckled him.

Piers, you are really a jerk beyond description. The people in the clip you played of the hearing was nothing like your description. You said the defenders of the 2nd amendment shouted at Mr. Heslin about their gun rights. What I saw was that Mr. healing point blank asked for a response and several voices were heard in a normal tone in response to his question. They were of the opinion that their rights to have weapons of their own choice should not be limited by the government. You used the poor bereaved father's sorrowful countenance to your advantage, YOU THINK, but I am certain he secretly wishes he had been in that school with an AR15 in order to save his son's life as well as others' lives. You are a sickeningly biased "journalist" and a detriment to CNN. I hope your ratings continue to plummet, because you really deserve the boot.

Sheriff Clarke's is absolutely correct. We are responsible for our own safety. What if you can't call 911? Should you just wait for the perp to kill you? Mr Morgan is an idiot that believes all you have to do is call the cops and they will come save your ass. Two years ago, four armed thugs kicked my door in and I was not able to call 911 until AFTER it was all over. I'm alive today because I am a responsible, law-abiding citizen that stood my round armed with a legally purchased and licensed 9MM semi-automatic handgun that holds 15 rounds.

Under all the current proposals, my handgun would be illegal, yet I am a not a criminal. Get a grip Mr Morgan, criminals DO NOT obey the laws. If I carry only 10 rounds to be legal, will the bad guy obey the law and not obtain a handgun to commit a crime? No, of course not. Will the criminal only carry 10 rounds when he goes out to commit the crime? Of course not. Great law. Honest people become targets unless they become criminals themselves. Penalizing an honest citizen that elects to stay alive is the most absurd thing I have ever heard.

Mr Morgan, you need to get off your high horse and let your guests talk. You don;t get the answer you want to you talk over them and cut them off. Your treatment of Sheriff Clarke was shameful and very unprofessional.

The constant talk about the AR15 being an assault rifle is absurd. The look of the rifle doesn't make it more lethal than any other gun. It is not an automatic weapon, which would spray a large number of rounds. It fires one round each time you pull the trigger, just lake any handgun. Automatic weapons have been illegal since the 1930s. Before you spout a lot of nonsense, you should learn about the guns. Mr Morgan, you should listen to Dana Loesch. You interrupt her every time she is on too and she know what she is talking about. Let people talk and listen to what they say. You just might learn something.

The government can pass laws that make criminals out of the law-abiding citizens and the criminals will still commit crimes. Gun-free zones.... Another great idea. All of these mass shootings have occurred in such zones. Sure they did, the honest person observes the sign and the criminal will not. Go after the nutbags, not the law-abiding citizens that legally own handguns to protect themselves.

Automatic weapons are NOT illegal. People keep saying this and it's just not true. They are just heavily regulated and taxed. If you're not a criminal and have the money to afford one, you can buy one.

The ideas on the table, however, do nothing to get the nutbags. Banning the AR15, a semi-automatic .223, a small caliber rifle that fires one bullet each time you pull the trigger just like a handgun??? The rifle with a collapsible stock and a pistol grip that do absolutely NOTHING to make it more lethal??? Reducing the capacity of magazines that will make most of the legally owned handguns illegal??? All of this affects the honest citizens and does nothing to keep them out of the hands of the nutbags.

Lanza tried to buy a gun and couldn't. The current background check in Connecticut, which has stricter gun laws than most other states worked!!! So what new law would have kept Sandy Hook from happening? Nothing the government is proposing so far. They keep talking about mental health, but that has to be done at the state level.

In the meantime, penalizing law-abiding people with more laws that don't solve the problem is just a waste of time.

I'm pretty sure that people who had to face a lynch mob would have loved to have an AR-15 with high capacity magazines. They may not have survived the encounter, but it would improve their odds while also taking a lot of the attackers with them.

No one can predict what type of weapon would be best for self defense. It could be a handgun or shotgun in your house or an AR-15 or AR-10 in the woods. If a grizzly was after me, I'd hope to have an AR-10 with a high capacity magazine. It's up to me to make that decision for myself and not have it made by someone else.

WELL DUH THAT IS A TRUE FACT.BUT DUH HE IS ALSO AKING FOR A REDUCTION OF AMMO IN A GUN.AND IF YOU SAW THE NEWS ABOUT A MONTH AGO ABOUT A MOM,AND HER TWO CHILDREN ALONE IN THEIR HOME,WHEN AN INTRUDER BROKE IN,SHE WAS ABLE TO DEFEND HER BY CHANCE OF LUCK.BECAUSE SHE HAD A SIX SHOT REVOLVER,AND IT WAS ONE BAD GUY.HAD IT BEEN MORE THAN ONE,SHE PROBABLY WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE SIX O,CLOCK NEWS WITH HER TWO SONS.SO DUH THIS IS WHY WE DON,T WANT LESS AMMO.OR RESTICTIONS. YOU PROCESS A CRIMINAL,WHEN A CRIME HE COMMITS.BUT DUH COULD YOU PLEASE SEND ME A LIST OF THESE CRIMINALS SO I CAN KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR THEM.THANKS DUH YOUR SUCH A SMART PERSON.WISH THERE WERE MORE LIKE YOU AND PIERS MORGAN.

Watched Piers' show tonight for the first and only time and was sickened as that smug liberal Englishman tried unsuccessfully to make the straight talking Sheriff Clark look bad on national TV. Why did he have the Sheriff on if he didn't want to let him talk? The Sheriff is one of the few elected officials in this town that is not afraid to tell it like it is. His main message was to take responsibility for yourself and do something to protect yourself and your family.

Shame on CNN for putting this tripe on the air. But then again, this is why I don't EVER watch CNN.

How do you have this guy on tv and support the banning of assault style weapons when it was not an assault weapon that did the damage at Sandy Hook. I watched it as it unfolded and the rifle was pulled from the trunk of the car. Pistols were the weapon of choice so you entire argument is a crock

Pierce
I am astounded that nobody in all media that I watch goes into any detail about the gun manufactures? These are the corporations that fund the NRA and fund the lobbying that allows them to continue making ever more weapons.They are the square root to the problem. Who are they? whats there name? what sort of mansions do they live in? , what do there children think of the business? etc etc. They appear untoucheable because they don't seem part of the media concerns. Strange.

Sorry, but that is ridiculous. CRIMINALS are killing people, not the gun manufacturers. People drink too much beer at a football game then get in the car, then crash into an innocent victim and kill him or her. Shall we go after Budweiser for making the beer? The manufacturers ARE NOT the root of the problem.

That is absurd. How about holding the criminal accountable for his actions instead of pushing the blame on the honest, law-abiding gun-owners and manufacturers?

People get tired of hearing the statement "Guns don't kill people, people kill people" but it is a true statement. None of my guns has ever gone out and killed anyone all by themselves.

I may agree that guns are bad all over the world and they are used to murder 100s of thousands of people. What gives these other countries and terrorists and dictator countries all the money they need to buy weapons, OIL. What is destroying our planet, OIL. Why don't you people fight the biggest fight, fight to get rid of the use of OIL and thus the supply of money to those who will use weapons to harm us and anyone else they decide to harm. There are so many bigger things to address and the media chooses the smaller things. Yes, people die from guns, but people also are dying from OIL. Come on people, it is all about money. The rich want more just because and the poor end up dead by a gun or by some severe weather due to the use of fossil fuels. When will you humans learn that there are better things we can do besides making money from OIL and guns which go hand in hand by the way. Heck, the US weapons companies would not make as much money if it were not for countries that are oil rich and weapon crazy. Why don't we just get rid of guns and weapons totally? Ahh, you won't touch that one will you? I say the first thing that should be done is to disarm all terrorist countries and that includes our so called allies. After that, when all of the weapons are removed from all other countries and militaries, then we should eliminate guns here in the US. It will never happen though, because all of you wealthy people out there need armed security forces to protect your wealth. Again, it is all about MONEY, the root of all evil deeds. Who is to say that many of these people that commit mass murders would not have done that if they were already rich and had no financial worries. Many of these mass murders are acts of desperation by people who just gave up trying to achieve a false dream that is sucked up by the GREEDY idiots of this planet. You need to look at the bigger picture. The separation of the classes will destroy this planet because those that need to have billions of dollars will always do whatever they want no matter who it harms. It may not be by a gun, but it is harm none the less. We need to learn from the past sometime. Look at Rome, why did it fall? Why doesn't the media discuss a little history and reflect on how money corrupts absolutely. It just makes me sick that so much is said about guns when the real problem is corruption and money, what about the harm to humans that causes? The media is corrupt and greedy as well.

we need to all get together and march on CNN and call for him to be let go are you with me? He is the Obama Beck the prolbem is he is a liar a small month rude jerk that hates us and lives off the money he can make here and not in his wonderful gun free country. let do this lets march on him.

Old Fears Morgan is rubbish. He has been kicked out of his own country from what I understand and doesn't know anything about the topics that he has opinions on. Only in America will we broadcast other countries rubbish on prime time television. He has already questioned at least one guest on how they can go after our handguns next. Now as far as the first amendment and that conversation, about taking away handguns which is what they will want to do next if, and I mean if, they pass any new gun legislation, those are fighting words Fears Morgan and they are not protected by the 1st amendment.

Old Fears always likes to pose the question "What do you need an assault weapon for?" I'd like to ask him "which idiot gave you a prime time slot on a major news network?"

Oh and another thing Fears CNN is supposed to be about facts. Please leave your tabloid rubbish across the pond. I can't believe they replaced Larry King with you. What a disgrace CNN has become.

Just in case, many of you still didn't know what Morgan did in the past...

He was sacked from his position as editor of the Tabloid paper, Daily Mirror, in 2004 for faking pictures of British soldiers in Iraq allegedly abusing a prisoner – photos that British Ministry of Defense officials said needlessly endangered the lives of British troops deployed at the time.

after you kick back and you see the truth he does you use the kids that die and that is sick you may wish to stop watching him and start watching some one who tell the truth. watch him for fun but here watch this.
GBTV – The Glenn Beck Program – Soros, The UN, And Attacks On gets so truth in your life

they took Beck off due to Soros and Obama as they also hate fox news. this guy is to get the people watching one hand as they hit you in the back of the head with the other hand. does he get you anger yes that the trick do you see it now

If you do not want gun control YOU find a way to end the epidemic of mass killings of innocent people. Every mass shooting brings more people into the gun control camp. And what kind of people heckle a parent who has lost a child? Those people make gun advocates look like jerks and haters.

Grant Duwe, a criminologist with the Minnesota Department of Corrections who has written a history of mass murders in America, said that while mass shootings rose between the 1960s and the 1990s, they actually dropped in the 2000s. And mass killings actually reached their peak in 1929, according to his data. He estimates that there were 32 in the 1980s, 42 in the 1990s and 26 in the first decade of the century.
“Chances of being killed in a mass shooting, he says, are probably no greater than being struck by lightning.”

Hi Ainsley, I prefer to use satire over lies and intimidation to make points.
Definition : Satire is a genre of literature, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, and society itself, into improvement. Although satire is usually meant to be funny, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon.

That vidio you watched was an edited version, leaving 20 seconds out of it in order to make it appear that he was heckeled. Just another example of Media presenting a false picture in order to promote something they do not understand. You can check this out by asking your computer. It is tragic that something like Sandy Hook Happened, but the Weapons owners are not monsters as some people would have you believe. Law abiding citizens do not go out and commit mass murder. Only criminals do that, and we did not force the criminal to pick up any weapon. Ask yourself if you made them do it? Of course not because you respect the law. So do we.

To Chris Murpy
I am shocked that as a politician you continue to make such agenda driven, uneducated, totally ignorant comments about the second amendment. Which you swore to up hold.
If you read nothing else read this. The second amendment is not about hunting. It's not about sport shooting, as you said last night on CNN. The real 2nd amendmnet are you kidding me? And you were eleceted?
If you say it's about home protection at least you will be a bit closer.
The bottom line is, the Second amendment was written to protect citizens from people like you.
It was written to insure that politicians and government do not infringe on the right of the people by disarming and ruling them in tyranny.
Shame on you for making this horrific event at Sandy Hook part of a political agenda and claiming that you are a supporter of the 2nd amendment.
You are purposely misleading the public by your comments. I believe that this will come back to haunt you in your political career.
I plea with you to read your history, understand what you swore to uphold and stop making ridiculous comments on television and embarrassing yourself and the state of Connecticut.

I have attached a link to help you understand the meaning and the thought process of our forefathers. To help education you.
http://www.godseesyou.com/2nd_amendment_quotes.html

Senator Chris Murphy states that he believes in the REAL 2nd Amendment? Not the imaginary Second Amendment?

He thinks the Second Amendment has always allowed the people, through their elected leaders, to decide what weapons are reserved for the military and what weapons can be in the hands of private citizens?

Who is this guy and where has the 2nd Amendment been written or interpreted like this?

All you people on both sides of this issue, criminals and the mentally ill are the danger to society, not law abiding people, whether they are a knife owner, musket owner or semi automatic rifle owner.

The 2nd amendment came in to law a long time ago when life was very different. Laws need to reflect the reality of the times we live in now. The NRA & Americans are kidding themselves if they need to go back and protect an amendment that isn't a benefit for people in this day and age. Americans keep killing Americans and that won't change until the laws change. Your country needs to do the rright thing. Otherwise you are not much better than some 3rd world countries. Your Current NRA needs to go. They are misguiding many people and outright lying to protect the large amounts of money they are getting. It is always about money, disguised as -t is our right.

Sharon, what is the reality now? We have police officers assigned to protect each individual American? Our government is under control and not expanding its powers while bankrupting us? What exactly makes you think the reality is different?

Or is it that we've all been trained to be good martyrs and should just accept our death and injury at the hands of others for the greater good? You referred to America as "your country" so you must be in one of those countries where you're still a subject under the rule of some sovereign. You need to know that all the power that the government of the United States come from the people of the United States but it is very possible for the government to get out of control and ignore the people. That's happening now. Our power vs the power of the government is completely unbalanced now and we must do what we can to stop that gap from growing.

Do you really think your government will not abuse you, ever?
A tyrannical act was committed by the US government against the American citizens, indeed.
Nikkei people were placed in detention camps during WW2. Many of them died in there.
And you know what? FDR did it with an executive order... how is this not a form of tyranny?

The government would have not even attempted it if they didn’t think they could easily manage this particular populace. Coming from gun-free country, I assume the majority of them were not well-armed. They were wronged by the government because of their pacifistic nature and the lack of imagination in what governments can do.

Mr. Morgan, I sit there and listened to this interview where you stated that you didnt like it when people shouted out at Neil Hesley, but all you do is shout down those that have differing opinions than you. You shout down people and call them rediculous when they tell you it is important for every citizen to be armed and to be prepared. Why is it so rediculous to you that Gov't Tyranny might hit this country? It has affected nearly every other country throughout history, are you so naive as to think it will never strike America? Why Mr. Morgan do you think no other country has ever tried to invade America? You think its our military might? No absolutely not, our real might lies in the hands of the citizens, our armed citizens can repel any invading force, and can keep our government from ever becoming Tyrannical, why do you encourage people to be victims Mr. Morgan? Everyone on earth should live like they are going to encounter a bad guy sometime in thier life, everyone on earth should live like they are going to encounter a disaster, bad weather of some kind. Why do you encourage victimhood in the face of this Morgan? Every one that can read, read this, arm yourself, arm yourself with everykind of firearm available to you, prepare yourself for any disaster with food and water. And do not be a victim!!!, not to a bad guy, not to an invading country or terrorist, and not to a tyrannical governement.

Sharon, some things never change and the reality is that there will always be evil people, both inside and outside of government. I own my guns for only one purpose; to protect my freedom. The push to ban assault weapons is just a back handed attempt to eventually ban all guns and disarm America. More people are killed every year with fists, feet and blunt objects (see FBI statistics at this link http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls) than with rifles of any kind, much less assault weapons. There are bad people in the world and bad people always look for sheep to attack. If we want a more civilized society, right to carry should be passed and allowed in every state and there should be no such thing as a gun free zone. Criminals are cowards at heart, if you don't believe me, show me the last time there was a mass shooting in a gun shop.

I am commenting to say that I had watched part of this night's show, and I was going to compliment you for the polite way you treated your guests, allowing them to finish what they had to say, or actually complete a response to your questions. I see from comments from people who actually saw the complete show, that you were interrupting and behaving "rudely" to your guests as always. I was mistaken.

In any case, Mr. Morgan, since you are claiming you have never heard of anyone defending themselves with an AR-15, please view the numerous reports of January, 24, 2013, in which a New York state university student defended himself and his roommate from armed home intruders with an AR-15. I fail to see CNN on the list of sources in an online search. How can the national news leader not only FAIL to report on how a firearm was used in self defense, not murder, but that an AR-15 was used in New York to defend against armed intruders?

In fairness, Mr. Morgan, could you personally report on cases like these as a journalist, please stop playing the fool with the argument "I've never heard of it," and stop saying your famous "Who needs an assault weapon?" and "I've never heard of anyone defending themselves with an assault weapon." It happens, whether or not you are willing to listen. Who needs them? People just like these two university students who had two armed men break into their home and came upstairs to silence them.

But one has to wonder... why Daily Mirror had to fire him if he is such a “champion”.

The paper issued a statement saying it had been the victim of Morgan's "calculated and malicious hoax," and that the Queen's Lancashire Regiment – the unit singled out by the Daily Mirror – had been "vindicated" by Morgan's dismissal.

"It is just a great pity it has taken so long... and that so much damage has been done in the meantime," said a spokesman for the unit, Roger Goodman.

But he's not, he's a journalist who's looking to draw out a tragic story to improve his declining viewership. You have to remember Piers was sacked from the British tabloid, The Daily Mirror, where he was the editor for fabricating pictures of British solders abusing Iragi prisoners. Knowing this how can anyone trust his integrity.

Esteemed Mr Morgan
Your crusade against guns is becoming old and tiring. I can't watch CNN or your program without throwing up.
I am a gun owner. I have concealed weapons licence. And all you advocate is nonsense. All modern hand guns have larger capacity magazine then 10 bullets.
What you should advocate to find a solution that mentally unstable people couldn't buy weapons.
After 9-11 We the people of the free world, not just US citizens, we lost our freedom. I have to get undressed if I wish to fly. And every time some idiot comes up with some new idea for terrorism we respond, by restricting all the people: No water bottle on plains, take the shoes off take you belt off and so on.
This is not a good solution. This only took away the dissent peoples wright to privacy and dignity.
President Kennedy was assassinated with a 22 bullet one of the smallest.
Please find some new subject for your program, or CNN will loose me as a viewer.

President Kennedy was killed with a 6.5 mm round shot from an italian carcano rifle, if you believe the stories, and a .50 desert eagle holds 7 rounds, the .44 desert eagle holds 8 and the .357 desert eagle holds 9

Guns symbolize the worst of mankind. They are killing tools, designed to destroy and take life. It's happening slowly, but never the less right before our eyes, ...evolution is taking place.

We live in the informational revolution, and as the world becomes more informed, more educated, it will become more civilized.

History will look back on this as a transformational time, where humanity struggled, but in the end broke free of the past, and stepped forward away from brutality and fear towards intellect and peace.

Guns – The American nation is not going to do without guns. It will remain for our protection, defense, safety and security. The second amendment is here to stay forever – nobody can change it. With that America becomes a nation that respects amendments and abides by them at all times. As regards guns every American will say that the second amendment gives them the right to own a firearm (be it a gun with x number and rounds of bullets or a magazine with y rounds). The gun debate will go on forever and by the time anything changes it will only be by some catastrophic event beyond all the mass shootings that have taken place during the past few years using advanced firearms (they may be termed military style or assault weapons or by any other name)
With all this being said Americans do understand that Piers Morgan is trying very hard to make people understand that such advanced firearms are not necessary for hunting, sport and other activities that harm people. Of course in all fairness violence has to be prevented, mass shootings have to be eliminated, and all this takes a lot of efort on the part of a large number of people for a long time (undefined time period) before the mass shootings are reduced and eliminated
Taking examples and learning from other nations and incidents may be good, but only when it happens in our backyard will that realization come to us
We all pray and hope that day will come and hope it is not far off
SB

Piers- thank you for not giving up on America while you and many of us wrestle with this issue. I want also to present a side that is not discussed much and that is helping those who see their loved ones, friends, fellow students, teachers, etc. gunned down before their eyes or in near vicinity. It is horrific to them. Many times the light goes out of their eyes and the support it takes to move them back to any assemblance of normal trust is long and difficult. I wonder if those who's children or close friends who were suffering due to "extremely high" amounts of magazines used would be so minded to keep those huge numbers of guns available in our country. Also, maybe we should begin therapy for folks who have to give up gun addiction and spend some of our mental health dollars that direction along with other mental health disorders. Maybe giving up just some of that need for gun freedom could save the spirit and lives of others.

Piers – You lose all journalistic credibility when you materially edit content to advance a personal agenda. I held you in higher regard than that. You are now no different than Rush Limbaugh, Rachel Maddow, Bill Maher, or Glenn Beck. I can no longer trust what you present as fact and I will no longer watch your program. Shame on you.

Exposing the truth, as ugly as it may be, gives journalistic credibility, it doesn't take it away. And just like Lance Armstrong, when people get exposed, they file charges, lie, spin and try to discredit the whistle blowers.

UK gun free zone, no guns allowed:
"A 16-year-old boy stabbed to death with swords just 100 yards from his home begged for his life as a gang set on him like a “pack of dogs”, eye-witnesses have claimed."

Is your concern mainly for the mass-killings that happen in a very short period of time?
FBI Uniform Crime Reports show that “Knives or cutting instruments” have been used in about 1,800 homicides per year. (That’s more than 20 times as many as the assault weapon homicides.) I guess 2-digit figures of stabbing casualty rarely happens at once at the same place, but is that the real issue here?
Isn’t it the total number of the casualties throughout the year that we need to worry about, and not so much the concentration of casualties...

"In the 1990s, politicians backed by the NRA attacked researchers for publishing data on firearm research. For good measure, they also went after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for funding the research. According to the NRA, such science is not “legitimate.” To make sure federal agencies got the message, Rep. Jay Dickey (R-Ark.) sponsored an amendment that stripped $2.6 million from the CDC’s budget, the exact amount it had spent on firearms research the previous year."

Morgan was fired as Editor of the Daily Mirror on 14 May 2004 after authorizing the newspaper's publication of photographs allegedly showing Iraqi prisoners being abused by British Army soldiers from the Queen's Lancashire Regiment.[17] Within days the photographs were shown to be crude fakes. Under the headline "SORRY.. WE WERE HOAXED", the Mirror responded that it had fallen victim to a "calculated and malicious hoax" and apologized for the publication of the photographs.

why don't you check it out. I did. With all the back up files. The NRA is not a KKK it is an organization, that is funded, by people who like to own guns. Which happens to be our 2nd amendment write to do so. Lucky to us gun owners that they are here, without them that write would be gone in a jiffy

The NRA has been deliberately suppressing the official study of gun impact on society for a very long time. Why? Because when people find out the true statistics gun sales will diminish and they will loose money.

But here's the thing, we are to the point where we don't even need the stats anymore. The gun atrocity is happening all the time, everywhere. People are starting to wise up. The jig is up folks, high capacity killing tools have no place in civilian society.

You are wrong: The amount of guns sold to civilians is just a drop in the bucket in comparison to the army's world wide. Gun makers will stay in business without your baying or nut. And it is not the gun makers that pays the dues to NRA. It is the gun owners, who are aware of the need for a strong forum to protect our 2nd amendment rights from people who thinks like Mr Morgan and You. And that is Your wright because the !st amendment.
Isn't this a wonderful country!!! God Bless America!

I 100% agree with you on this! Also knowing that Piers' newspaper led a relentless national campaign to get handguns confiscated and banned in Britain. Piers talks about respecting the second amendment and claims he doesn't have a problem with people owning handguns for protection. Just how can we believe his honesty on this after what he did in Britain.

You are right it has nothing to do with Piers directly however his continued miss reporting on news is unacceptable for example there was no AR15 used the Newtown shooting the gun was found in the car but he continues to lie to the American public and that is unacceptable if you cant report the truth than you need to go back to your own country we certainly don’t need more lire’s in the USA.

The problem I have with Mr Morgan. He is milking this story over, and over again until people like Seth get more and more excited until he is ready to bang on my door to give him my guns and that is not advisable for his health.
This story is far now from Newton it became a political football for anti-gun activists. Most gun shops are all sold out of ammo and guns. So maybe it works against Mr Morgans "Ideas"

Nothing will be done about gun control until mothers get heavily involved. Mothers will not get involved until they SEE the gore and destruction for themselves. If everyone could see pictures of the Newtown and Columbine massacres to name a few I guarantee it would shake people up and open many eyes. When it's just words they can easily tuned it out. But if it's a picture it's not so easy.
I have never been a particularly big fan of your show in the past but you have won me over. I applaud you for taking on such a controversial issue. Keep it up. I'm with you all the way.

There is so much more gore and destruction than is found splattered on the floors after Columbine, Aurora, New town and others, there is the gore and destruction of the light leaving the childrens' eyes, their shattered since of trust, hope, etc. Feel we could use some of the mental health dollars to provide gun addiction therapy...how often do you use your gun, think of your gun, want to use your gun, etc. Maybe spending that energy on promoting support to those who's lives were shattered would be better spent.

(1) Buy more guns; (2) Lay low, wait for another deranged gunman to show up at school; (4) Have a shoot out & hope for the best;; (5) Wipe the blood of our children off the classroom floor..... If this isn't the looniest, dumbest, idiotic moronic insane beyond insane"strategy" ever uttered by a bunch of morons with guns, then I don't know what is.... If this is the BEST MINDS FROM THE SECOND AMENDMENT RANTERS.... then NONE OF THESE MORONS SHOULD BE ENTRUSTED WITH SO MUCH AS AN ELECTRIC PENCIL SHARPENER.... LET ALONE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (AR15s)!!!!!

Reading most of these posts, I can't help wonder if the average IQ of most of these posters reaches anything above a 10.... None of these fools mention the massacre of those Newtown children. They completely ignore the need for practical solutions and they are cowards by looking the other way and pretending 6 yr olds weren't murdered in cold blood.... These inflexible, bull-headed fools are only good for one thing: crying in hysteria about their guns being taken away from them..... What a bunch of loser/sociopaths these "people" are.... Our Founding Fathers would be turning in their graves seeing these cowardly morons talk about gun parts instead of taking meaningful actions to save the lives of children.... Degenerates that are destroying this country!

Irene: What sarcasm???? A sociopath is a person who has no conscience.... Look it up in the Psychiatric Diagnostic Manual! What do you want to call men who cling to their selfish, self-centered, arrogant, ignorant beliefs and turn their heads when innocent children are murdered???? Angels???? Saints???? They're degenerates! What would YOU like to call them??????

First of all, no one thinks “Wipe the blood of our children off the classroom floor” is a solution.
Second, everyone posting here has an IQ of above 10.
Third, Most of the pro-gun people are NOT a bunch of loser/sociopaths.
Fourth, They all can very well be trusted with AN ELECTRIC PENCIL SHARPENER..

First, Morgan is an idiot. His belief that a disarmed society is a safer society is born of fear and an unwillingness to take responsibility for his own self protection. The police do thier best but they cannot be everywhere at all times, as is evidenced by any attack on the news. The police really can only report crime, not prevent it. I am truly saddened at the Sandy Hook attack, I pray for Neil Heslin and all the families of all such atrocities. But to blame the instrument is to ignore the root cause. The gun can't kill untill someone loads, aims and fires it. A teacher with a small caliber pistol could have stopped the shooter quickly and saved many young lives. The horror was caused by the shooter, not the gun.
Piers, thank you for your idiotic drivvel, you have just helped me decide to join the National Rifle Association. True patriots like the N.R.A need our support now more than ever. May I nominate Wayne LaPierre for President of the United States, and Sheriff David Clarke as his running mate. Deport Piers Morgan and I'll keep my gun....

Easy Stephan, nobody's proposing banging on your door to take your guns. Personally I would like to see assault weapons and high capacity magazines made to be as illegal as high explosives. Then owners could choose whether they want to continue to own them or not.

Also it would be great to put a huge tax on any ammunition that fits in these types of weapons, and use the tax revenue to reduce gun proliferation, like a cigarette tax.

10 rounds is too much. The law only allows 3 when hunting pheasants. What, are pheasants more important than people?

6 rounds, that should be the maximum limit. Anybody who thinks they need more that this is way too afraid, and must be a lousy shot. I mean come on man, you need 10, 20, 30 round clips. That's pathetic.

Seth, I have to assume you have never been a violent crime victim. You say 10 rounds would be too much. Until you have been a victim, don't make such idiotic comments. The second amendment is not about hunting so why make such a remark about shooting birds.

I am alive today because I confronted the 4 armed thugs entering MY HOUSE with a 9MM semi-automatic pistol with 17 rounds. If I had only 10 rounds (or 7 in if I lived in New York), I would be VERY DEAD.

There is a little girl out here that is happy to be alive because this law-abiding citizen with a concealed carry permit was around for her.

Why is it the only conversation is about the criminals committing these horrific crimes, but there is never any mention of a responsible gun owner that either saved himself/herself and their family or saved the life of a total stranger?

When those 4 armed thugs kicked my door in, there was no time to call 911. Responsible gun owners have no problems with legislation that will reduce gun violence. So far, the solutions on the table only restrict the people NOT committing all these crimes. None of the ideas so far even mention mental health and in most cases, that is the problem, not their guns.

Now we hear about going after gun manufacturers. How absurd is that? Drunk drivers kill innocent people every day in this country but we don't go after the liquor manufacturers.

Get a grip people, responsible, law-abiding gun owners are not the problem, the BAD GUYS are. Personally I would not want to be unarmed when confronted by an armed criminal. And, I would rather have my gun and not need it or need a gun and not have it.

hey morgan, what happened to sir pakenham at the battle of new orleans? i'm sre you know or they told you a lie in your history class, he was absolutely without a dout beaten by ameican forces under andrew jackson at the battle of new orleans even though we were outnumbered 2 to 1 and packenham had troops fresh from beating napolean at waterloo. ou know how we did it? because we love our guns and we are the best in the world with them ! i bet that gets under your thin british skin doesn't it?

Well i guess you can tell that we don't like the british down here in south carolina except for major patrick furguson , we liked him so much that we buried him on top of KING'S MOUNTAIN .i don't know but i heard that his last words to his men were ( DON'T WORRY OLD CHAPS, THIS RABBLE CAN NOT SHOOT) LOL SOMETIMES I LAUGH SO HARD IT HURTS

I am offering an opinion on the Pro-Gun Americans. I would guess that a good portion also espouse Christianity as their belief system. Matthew 5: 38 – 48 speaks on retaliation and loving your enemies. I would hope you would trying asking the HARD question, "what would God say regarding the stance of I need to save my family." I think you will also find "Vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord".

Make the registered owner of any assault weapon criminally and civilly responsible for any damage or loss of life that his/her weapon is involved in, regardless of who the person was carrying the weapon at the time of the crime.

If people want to own these weapons, they should own the tremendous responsibility of doing so, and be held accountable.

So if a spouse, son, daughter, uncle, brother, friend, friend of son, etc... gets you assault weapon and commits a crime you are completely liable, and criminally prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Anyone with a brain knows that the intent of the 2nd Ammendment is to put the citizens of the United States on equal ground with the military. If the people of this country reasonably believe that it's government must be ousted, then they will have the advantage of being equally armed to defend themselves from the military forces that would surely be unleashed upon them. If you don't think that this government can turn tyrannical, that it could never happen here, then you're living in a dream world. Just ask the 3 million dead Jews who thought that it could never happen to them either.
Additionally take a look at what has happened in Australia with their gun bans. Crime has spiked to sickening levels because the criminals who didn't turn in their weapons now know that their prey is unable to protect themselves, and their citizens warn Americans not to go down the same road, that it was a huge mistake. too late for them.

Hi Andrew, the gun laws which were introduced in Australia in 1996 are broadly popular according to the article by Prime Minister John Howard in the New York Times recently. Violent crime hasn't spiked, it's down. No firearm related mass murders either.

Do you really think your government will not abuse you, ever?
A tyrannical act was committed by the US government against the American citizens, indeed.
Nikkei people were placed in detention camps during WW2. Many of them died in there.
And you know what? FDR did it with an executive order... how is this not a form of tyranny?

The government may not have even attempted it, if they didn’t think they could easily manage this particular populace. Coming from a gun-free country, I assume the majority of them were not well-armed. They were wronged by the government because of their pacifistic nature and the lack of imagination in what governments can do.

"The government may not have even attempted it, if they didn’t think they could easily manage this particular populace." - Deterrence. That's the point. Do you think FDR would've done it knowing many American citizens could die fighting?

- well then an AR15 isn't going to save you.
You are wrong again there.

You think “fight against tyranny” only means an all-out war between the government and the citizenry... civilians are no longer any match for the military force even with assault weapons, so what’s the point of having them, eh? …Wrong!

Tyrannical leaders do not want public outcry, much less International attention, if the International community notices what they’re doing, they have very little chance in succeeding. If any government (especially major democratic countries) used a tank or bomb against their own people, you can imagine that other countries are going to know it almost immediately, right? (Even Communist China couldn't hide it.) Do you think the government can give the world a persuadable enough justification for it? If something like that happened in the US, do you think England, France, Germany, Italy, India, South Korea, Canada, (not sure about Russia and China) will just stand idly by and watch??

So, unless the government can do it without other countries knowing, tyranny won’t stand a chance. If the majority of the populace stands up with powerful firearms, there is no way for the government to be able to suppress them without causing massive commotion. We still way outnumber them. We can give them a heck of a hard time. Even after the government got the control over the media, if tenacious insurgencies occur here and there, it would suffice to sound the alarm to the world that our liberty is being threatened, so is the liberty of the entire world.

By the way, tyrants know that too (they are crazy but not stupid), so they won’t do a thing until they can relatively disarm the populace and make them controllable first. Thus, as long as we are well-armed, we are safe. As long as the government fears the people, we have liberty. This is why, still today, the Second Amendment is a strong deterrence against tyranny.

""Tyrannical leaders do not want public outcry, much less International attention,""

Tedd, the NRA doesn't want public outcry. They don't want gun impact studies, they want silence and lots and lots of guns. The NRA operates like a tyrannical government, censorship, control, manipulation.

Without American service men and women willfully turning on fellow Americans (which would never happen in a million billion trillion years!) there is no threat of tyranny in America. There is however a very real threat of mass shootings in schools, churches, theaters and all of the other soft targets, any where in large or small town America.

- Without American service men and women willfully turning on fellow Americans (which would never happen in a million billion trillion years!) -

I just told you that it happened. Many internees died under poor living condition, and several were killed by sentries when they tried to escape. It only takes one mistake by one president. No one can guarantee it won’t never ever happen again.

Reasonable guns have a place in civilian America. A shotgun, bolt action deer rifle, etc... My issue is with high capacity rapid fire weapons that are suited for military use. We don't need these legally accessable on our streets.

I have a pump action shotgun that was given to my by my father. It holds 5 rounds, and you have to pump it. If a crazy broke into my house and stole it, they couldn't do what happened in Sandy Hook or Aurora with this type of weapon.

Seth, you aren't getting anything right today. The AR15 IS NOT a rapid fire weapon. Bullets are fire ONE AT A TIME just like a handgun. It is semi-automatic, not automatic. Semi-automatic only means bullets are fed through a magazine. Read up on the subject before making comments.

And btw..., I do know quite well what the difference is between a semi-auto and full automatic weapon is. And you can fire a semi-automatic very rapidly. In fact in the military and in law enforcement, semi-auto is the preferred selection versus full auto, for accuracy and ammunition economy.

The lamestream media is a great source of misinformation. It's the government, not the NRA that is scrambling. All the administration is doing is proposing more legislation that is "feel good" only and doesn't address the real problems.

All of the tough gun laws in Chicago aren't deterring the criminals. With over 500 homicides last year and 48 so far in January, it's obvious they aren't going about this right way.

At least the NRA made some good suggestions, but the liberal administration is not interested in logic and mainstream media is supporting it.

"All of the tough gun laws in Chicago aren't deterring the criminals."

Yes in Chicago the laws don't seem to be followed. People can drive right outside of city limits and buy all the guns they want from "on the border" gun dealers and bring them back to shoot the place up.

My suggestion for Chicago and other extreme places is that if can't obey written law then it would be time to confiscate all weapons. If all the weapons in and around Chicago were gone, there wouldn't be anymore shootings, now would there.

During the last ban in the 90's, Black Market production of banned weapons surged. Criminals profited heavily from the high prices paid to low quality fire arms. Prisoner in jail can make fire arms out of pens, that are just a lethal.

Seizing all guns won't stop anything in Chicago. Criminals are't going to go oh ok boys Rob Emanuel said to turn in our guns so hand them over. You are living in pixy dust land. Rob Emanual is most likely tied to the same criminals as Chicago has a long and corrupt history between politicians and criminal underground.

And your comment about the shotgun you own and not being able to be stolen and used Sandy hook style. It easily could just saw of fthe barrel and a delusional person could easily kill as many people with 5 shots. It is called spread. I shot gun could easily kill 3+ people per shot, and reloading isn't that hard on a shotgun. Justification doesn't mesh with reality.

so why is it that you people have to always say amd i quote "if the design of the weapon is to kill more people"!!!!! why is it that you say this.... its a sporting rifle... and a hunting rifle... not a "assult weapon" (fully automatic) the reasron why most civilians do not have a machine gun(assult weapon) is because they probably feel it is to dangerous to be a civilian and own one... anybody that can pass a background cheack and get approved the the gov. can own a machine gun.

I just wrote a comment regarding the strong belief that this was an organized crime of terror to advocate gun control and to justify weakening the U.S. 2nd Amendment. It did not go through and seems to have been censored. The 100 round clip is not the cause or issue, organized crime will continue to cause and commit these acts of terror to continue justifying more gun control until the U.S. is like the U.K., gun less.

Organized crime is using influence of the mind and abuse to commit these acts of terror to advocate gun control, a defenseless population.

1. Organized crime has identified a vulnerability that they can attack through acts of terror, our children and schools. Do you believe that our children need to be protected from﻿ organized crime acts of terror?

2. How will this limit on ammunition clips, 10 bullets, prevent organized crime from targeting schools again to commit acts of terror, and more gun control?

3. a) how long do you think it will be before the mob abuses another citizen, tries to corner him through homelessness, and manipulates him to "hit back at society" through a rage shooting or massacre to advocate gun control?

3. b) how long before the mob targets another citizen, abuses him with energy assault weapons, powerful radar aimed at inflicting deadly cancers through bone marrow damage, cell damage, inflammation, lung scars, etc. and manipulate him into killing another Federal judge and Senator to advocate gun control?

3. c) how long before the mob targets another citizen, convinces him that people are on the Hook in New Jersey following Hurricane Sandy and ignored while they suffer in the cold, and that if he commits a massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary with his brothers license from New Jersey it will make this injustice visible, to advocate gun control?

2nd Amendment

"The reason you find so many of us very reluctant to go down this road is we believe each step down this road leads to the next step and the next step and the next step," said the former Speaker of the House. "We actually think the Second Amendment is central to our liberties, .. "

Piers, I think he's on to the British.

British regimes subjugate the population through organized crime and corruption, charter of rights are gradually weakened similar to this attempt to weaken the 2nd Amendment, charter of rights are easily dismissed in court as citizens are targeted through organized crime, pushed to homelessness or murdered to prevent exposure of wrong doing or international human rights violations, censorship, etc, tyranny .. "let them eat cake" – Marie Antoinette

They are now using energy assault weapons, powerful radar assaults aimed at inflicting deadly cancers from neighboring homes, public places, at their court house to prevent addressing basic human rights violations in the Canadian Criminal Code 672.12 (1)(3), the right to a trial, the freedom of expression, etc. on the population that they want defenseless. .. dictatorship through organized crime hidden from the general population.

That is correct, I strongly﻿ believe organized crime is committing these massacres through abuse and influence of the mind to advocate gun control, a strategy to weaken the 2nd Amendment and the right to bear arms. They'll keep doing this until the U.S.is gun less like the U.K..

FBI statistics have showed that little if any affect occured out of the last Ban. While black market gun manufacturing by organized crime rings profited heavily and criminal access increased during the ban.

The US has fewer Gun Deaths in 2010 in any year since 1963 according to FBI. Even though gun violence in Urban areas has remained steady because of gang violence.

Banning of Guns won't reduce mass killings. Even Biden admits that proving Sandy hook is being politicized for political gain. People bent on mass killing find much more horrific ways to kill when guns are banned. Take a trip to the middle east sometime. Take guns away and the mentally ill will turn to pipe bombs, car bombs, other more devastating ways to die that make a gun shot wound seem trivial. Fixing the mental health system, and finding ways to deal with the mentally ill is the only way to stop mass killings.

The "ASSAULT" weapons ban is purely political and will save zero lives because 90% of gun crime is commited with a pistol. Banning "HIGH capacity magazine save all of .4 seconds to change magazines. Pistols are much more affective to commit mass killings and criminal actions than "ASSUALT WEAPONS".

Video games, Media are as much to blame for Sandy Hook as the guns. I myself have played most first person shooter games without incidnet much the same way 99.9% of the population has. It is the .1% who can't differentiate between violent video games, violent movies, and glorification of violent in the media coverage from reality. They see the extended coverage of mass shootings as acceptance and stardom for the killer instead of seeing the horrific violence and pain that is being caused. They see notoriety. The mentally ill need effective reporting and treatment. If that fails then involuntary detention and heaven forbid euthinasia. I feel euthenizing is more human than life time imprisonment.

Adam Machine guns are and have been banned for over 20 years. classification of weapons is much the same as classification of say cars , sports cars, station wagon, and trucks. They each serve a different purpose. I have fired many assualt weapons in my military career and an AR15 is nothing like them. The AR15 isn't as accurate, reliable or as durable as military grade weapons. They share look only.

Civil Rights, Amendments, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, etc, that protect the population from "oppressive laws" and oppression can all be weakened with time.

The 2nd Amendment is the right that protects all other rights, which is why in U.S. many consider it central to their liberties and unwilling to go down the path of gradually weakening this right.

There seems to be a lot of confusion as to what the right to bear arms is about in the U.S. and in other countries. It is not about hunting, it is to deter and prevent dictatorships and tyranny, which can take many hidden forms and is done through organized crime in different regimes.

Organized crime is committing acts of terror through abuse and influence of the mind to advocate gun control, weakening the 2nd Amendment like other rights can be modified and weakened with time. It is a strategy to create justification to weaken a right that protects freedom.

Please support the Rage Shooting Factors for the prevention of gun violence similar to the use of Suicide Factors for the prevention of suicides.

This man was fired for faking the news. He endangered the lives of British soldiers. It is in a report from the home office. He fled to America avoiding his phone hacking charges where he hacked the voicemail of a girl who was killed. His defence before he left England was, he was just passing on the rumors. Read it for yourself here. http://patdollard.com/2013/01/flashback-most-dishones-journalist-of-our-times-piers-morgan-fired-from-bbc-for-malicious-hoax-of-fake-iraqi-prisoner-abuse-that-caused-so-much-damage-served-as-al-qaeda-recruiting-pos/

I think that one of the biggest issues that is often being left out of this debate is what the second amendment truly stands for. It isn't about the freedom to own weapons or the freedom for the government to decide what weapons we can own, it is about the freedom that we have as Americans to be prepared for instances that get out of control. It is our freedom as Americans to rise up and stand against a tyrannical government or occupying body. I do not think that there is a reasonable use for assault weapons on a daily basis, but it is our right to own them and reason for owning is not a factor that someone gets to decide before they sell to me. History is a beautiful teacher in these issues. In nearly every instance throughout history where a nation becomes a dictatorship it is prefaced by the disarming of citizens. Gun bans are a step in that direction. Instead of taking away our guns , we should be taking measure in training our citizens in proper safety, giving stricter sentences for violent offenders, and actually teaching our children the values of patriotism and worth as a country. We have let our government get too much control over our lives and we need to become more aware and self sufficient citizens again.

Reply for CR and Jim. I am living in denial that your statistics give relevant info re firearm related deaths but I'll refute them anyway. "There has been a fall of 19 per cent in homicides since 2001/02", as measured by The Homicide Index in the British crime survey.

@ros, in terms of Britain’s homicide rate, it depends on where you base those numbers from as to whether you can claim there has been a drop or not in the homicide rate. If you take the numbers for the 70s or even 80s for that matter (excluding Nothern Ireland) Britain’s homicide rate has actually increased by about 15%.

Ros, it was Piers’ associates in the British media who exposed the Labor government had been under reporting the violent crime figures. Between 1998 and 2008 British hospitals saw a 50% increase in the number of violent crime victims.

The UK’s (not the Ukraine’s) homicide rate, despite its virtual gun ban, is still 40% higher than many of its large gun owning Western European neighbors. The Swiss privately own nearly 8 times as many firearms as the British, many of which are automatic assault rifles, and the Germans and French own nearly 5 times as many. Furthermore the Italians and Spanish, two other large gun owning European nations, own significantly more firearms than the British and have per capita homicides rates that are nearly 20% lower.

Nae, those are nice stats but where are your suggestions for making life better for you and your fellow citizens? You have to agree that your society still has BBS (Bullet Brain Syndrome) and it needs to be brought under control just like any other disease. Go to work and make your society better. Quoting stats doesn't accomplish anything because we all know stats are manipulated to serve a purpose by those who use them.

I’m having difficulty posting again. I’ll try to see if I can post one paragraph at a time...

If you think any of the stats (which I also post the sources) I present here are somehow manipulated, please refute them with the proof that support your accusations. Otherwise it’s just “you” saying that, which simply lacks in cogency.

Here are my suggestions to reduce tragedies of mass killings by unbalanced individuals. I believe we should focus more on the mental illness issue and look into violent movies and video games our young minds are exposed to as if they are a natural part of our culture. The Hollywood people should put their profits second to the healthy mental development of our children. If anti-gun people say the 2nd amendment is not without limit, then, I can say the same to the 1st amendment, can’t I? If we are going to ban assault weapons, shouldn’t we also ban the usage of imagery of those weapons in the entertainment industry? If we can save even one troubled youth from delusion, wouldn’t it be worth it?

Another thing I propose is that we should change the way we treat those who are mentally ill. The families of them are often faced with such stigma, a lot of times they feel embarrassed and can’t openly ask for help. We need to recognize that the mental illnesses are nothing different from suffering cancers, in many cases it’s not their fault that their brains don’t function normally. If we all can be more understandable and compassionate, that would encourage the families to get proper help for their troubled family members.

Also, if there are more adequate facilities, not jails, but more like rehabilitation centers for substance abuse, throughout the country readily available to the families of mentally ill or troubled, where they can take their family members without the worries of them being treated like criminals or receiving abuse from other criminals, where the families can trust that their troubled loved ones will be well taken care of by medical and psychiatric experts at almost no cost to them (state or federal-run), I think that could make a difference. That may help remove the threats of mentally-unstable individuals suddenly exploding and ending up harming others and themselves.

Nae, I can agree with those efforts to help those with psycological problems. It appears you think the real problem is that these individuals are the real cause of gun violence. In Vancouver, Canada very recently, a normal sociable guy, as his neighbours described him, ran amock in an apartment building and stabbed a dozen people. Fortunately there where no deaths. If this normal, sociable guy had a firearm, I'm posotive this story would have had a different ending. Firearms and the love affair that Americans have with those things is the problem. Even so called normal people can have psycological problems that cause them to commit acts of violence. Come on NAE give up this disease that permeates your society and really make a difference.

Gun-culture is not a disease. If you call it that, what would you call car-culture, a pandemic? How do you not consider a 3,000 lb. metal object going 70mph not lethal?? Why on earth would we (or any other part of the world for that matter) allow such recklessness in our society? Because it’s requisite to our modern societies, right? Because it’s requisite to our economic growth, right? You are not complaining about car-culture, nor calling it a disease, because “you benefit from having cars”. Yet, you don’t (or refuse to) understand some, if not many, of us actually benefit from having guns. Isn’t that a bit selfish? I believe our guns used for self-defense have prevented many more deaths than they have caused. Come on, we live in the world where some of us do commit evil or crazy acts against others. If we diminish the individuals’ ability to defend him/herself, there would be more victims. As for the Vancouver incident, if one or a few of the residents had a gun, the attacker with a knife could have been stopped before he was able to stab a dozen people... Can you deny that possibility with 100% certainty?

Yes, I do think the real problem is with the individuals who go on a rampage killing others. If the deranged wants to kill many others, he’ll find a way. He could build a bomb from fertilizers (which killed 168 people and injured over 800 in Oklahoma City by the way). Our utmost focus in preventing mass killings should be on these individuals with psychological problems.

oooops, I meant to say “How do you NOT consider a 3,000 lb. metal object going 70mph LETHAL??”

... And the lethality has been very well proven by the fact that we lose roughly 90 LIVES EVERY SINGLE DAY in our country. Is it only me who thinks 90 deaths a day are more concerning than 42 deaths a year? (That’s the annual average assault weapons have killed since the ban was lifted, according to Sen.Feinstein. And taking them away would only make the attackers choose different methods to carry out the atrocities, so how many do you really think we can save by banning them?)

1) To reduce assault style rifle violence mandate that owners must keep their weapons away from minors and disturbed individuals in the home or face severe civil and criminal consequences with mandatory prison time. Let your son go to school with your AR-10, AR-15, high capacity assault styled weapon because you didn't lock it away from him then lose your savings, your home and your freedom. If you locked it up and he stole it, then you are not culpable. But you run the risk to trust him or not. This would not include handguns.

2) To reduce handgun related violence declare the Bloods, Crips, MS13, Hells Angels, mafia, .... demonstrably violent gangs.... as TERRORISTS. Treat them like enemy combatants. Use the NDAA 2012 and extended Patriot Act against them. Sure we have too many people in prison and yet our crime rates are down – go figure. Just being in a demonstrably violent gang should make it illegal to own a gun. When you are a member of a gang you are forswearing your primary secular allegiance to the U.S.

Should these same rules apply to children who kill other people because they're texting and driving? How about if they're just chatting it up with their friends and crash? Far more people die because of texting and driving than "assault weapons".

‘ Far more people die because of texting and driving than "assault weapons".’

Very true. I’m with you, Jim.

Nearly 500,000 people are injured and 6,000 are killed each year because drivers are talking, texting and e-mailing behind the wheel.
http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/End-Distracted-Driving#ixzz2JmxTUY2D

The Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired on September 13, 2004. So, it’s been about 8.3 years since. Sen. Feinstein said, 350 people have been killed after the ban was lifted. 350 / 8.3 = 42.17

So, the number of people we can ‘possibly’ save by banning so-called assault weapons, (as long as attackers totally get discouraged from committing a mass killing simply because they can’t use those guns, and don’t use other guns or methods instead), is average 42 per year.

Can you guys see how many problems you have? All these things have to be dealt with to reduce the risk to others. It shows you have empathy to your fellow beings if you agree to be "Inconvenieced" by not being allowed to have military style weapons. Why do you want to have these things anyway? What is wrong with you? You don't make logical sense.

Vic, I can tell that you are a very decent guy and you are sincerely concerned about people’s lives. But if you think assault weapons are the biggest problem in our country, I’m afraid you are mistaken. Like I stated above, over 100 times more people (many of them are children and youth, too) are killed by using cell phones behind the wheel. Why are you not outraged by it? If we are gonna enforce new laws spending our lawmakers’ time and energy and our taxpayers money, I want to take on problems that can save more than 42 lives a year. How about make it an offense to have a cell phone within the driver’s reach (just as open container laws), unless it is secured in a hands-free device for instance? I for one think this is a more effective law in saving lives.

I think many of us are more emotionally-driven than logically. It seems to me it’s not the wisest course of action. Don’t you think most of us will agree to much stricter traffic laws, if we see the vivid images of each car accident that happens every single day? Automobile-related death happens four times more often than that of gun-related, but we just don’t know it. Because we got so complacent about car accidents, the media won’t take time reporting them. Or if they were to report each and every car accident as they tend to do each gun-related incident, it will take up all of their air time, and it’s probably impossible anyway. See, most people are not afraid of driving even though they should be, but afraid of assault weapons that kill less than lightning, which kills an average of 54 each year, according to the National Weather Service Storm Data.

I know most anti-gun people dislike the gun/car analogy, but isn’t it because it reveals the dead truth about the hypocrisy on how indifferent they are about car accident victims? Isn’t it because they don’t want any stricter traffic laws imposed on them, even to “save lives”? Are the car accident victims’ lives somehow worth less than the lives of gun victims? I think not.

I don’t own an AR-15 or any sort of the kind. I personally don’t feel the need right now or any time in the near future. But if someone wants to protect himself against gang bangers that may outgun him, it’s not my place to say that he can’t have it, just because I myself don’t need it. And I think there’s a good possibility the sight of assault weapons can intimidate criminals causing them to flee, so I have to agree it’s a good deterrent tool for some people. I can’t deny that. And I don’t want to compromise someone’s ability to defend him or herself.

Very well stated, Nae. Every time I bring up the auto related deaths due to drunk driving and texting, the anti-gunners say I am talking stupid. What is stupid, is the concept of infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens because of the actions of criminals. Ban this, ban that. It is so absurd.

Vic, the government feels the only way to reduce the risk to others is to infringe on the rights of law-abiding citizens. I have plenty of empathy, but we should not be inconvenienced because criminals commit horrible crimes. The criminals will always break laws and the law-abiding citizens will always obey them. Restricting or taking away the rights of the honest people, does NOTHING to reduce crime.

There are so many gun laws on the books that are not being strictly enforced, so new ones that only affect law-abiding people does nothing except make the politicians feel good because they can say they "did something".

Enforce the existing laws and prosecute to the fullest extent at all times WITHOUT infringing on rights of the rights of the citizens THAT ARE NOT COMMITTING THE CRIMES.

I want my weapons to protect myself and those close to me. As a survivor of a violent home invasion, I choose to be a survivor by defending myself. What's wrong with us??? No, sorry, but it's "what's wrong with you?" The guns are not going out there killing anyone. Criminals are the ones committing the crimes. I have a number of guns, and NOT ONE has EVER gone out there to kill someone all by themselves. It time to hold the criminal responsible the gun.

Those of you that chose to not defend yourself if you find yourself at risk, then that is your right and I respect that. Our choice to legally defend ourselves should be respected without question.

I learned a long time ago that 911help is not always a minute or two away to save our asses.

Alan, I'm assuming that by having a firearm in your home for protection means that firearm is loaded and ready to be used when or if it is needed and that every member of your household is trained in its safe use and are all of stable minds.

Vic,
I am assuming you think I am a total idiot and I object to your condescending tone. I am over 60 years old and have been shooting since I was 10 years old. My father taught me gun safety and I have taught gun safety classes in the past in a private setting and in city college campuses (including a police academy). I am of stable mind and live alone. My firearms are ALWAYS readily accessible in the event I need them.

A few years ago, my home was invaded by four armed thugs that we not there on a social call. I'm here to talk about it, so that makes me a survivor, not a "crazy gun nut" that most anti-gunners like to call us.

Why do all "solutions" involve penalizing a person that IS NOT the criminal instead of the person THAT IS the criminal? In addition to texting and driving deaths as Jim mentions, shall we penalize liquor manufacturers for drunk driving deaths?

None of the suggestions come close to fixing the problem. Even Joe Biden is admitting the proposed legislation won't do any thing to prevent another mass shooting like Sandy Hook. Lanza tried to buy a gun prior to the shooting but could not do so. The existing Connecticut law, which is considered strict compared to other states, worked.

So, instead he stole his mom's guns. Was she negligent? Of course she was. So far, mental health issues aren't being put on the table. Everything so far is punishing everyone BUT the criminal. Declaring violent criminals terrorists might be a stretch, especially anything done at the federal level may complicate local enforcement.

There are plenty of laws already on the books and they work, but they need to be strongly enforced ALL OF THE TIME to be effective. There are too many plea bargains and early jail releases that they call "in the interest of justice", which is absurd.

I don't want them banned or nationally registered. I gave two great options that would actually work to some greater or lesser extent and they weren't proffered a cures. I said reduce not eliminate. Negligent gun owners/parents should be held liable with regards to AR's and high capacity mags. It is a simple responsiblity. And gangs are terrorists and should be treated as such.

I feel your driving example is a straw man argument and that you didn't even read or digest my post. You dimissed the ideas w/o any real critique. Why?

Frank,
I don't favor banning or registration either. While I do agree that there should be severe penalties for negligent gun owners and/or parents, it will not do anything to reduce the gun violence. It is merely a punishment to the responsible party after an act has been committed and adjudicated in a court of law. and I meant to address that earlier. Banning won't work. It didn't work before.

Like I said, most of the existing laws work, but they aren't always enforced. In the case of Sandy Hook, the background check worked. Lanza stole his mom's guns. Could Sandy Hook been prevented if there was a law already on the books that would have punished his mom for being negligent? Not at all.

I did make a brief comment about violent criminals being classified as terrorists. It sounds good, but as I read up on law, anything the administration tries to pass on a federal level may be difficult to enforce locally because there are existing laws in each state that may have conflict. In charging a criminal at arraignment, having state and federal charges make for complicated prosecution because they are different jurisdictions which means multiple trials. There seem to be a lot of legal opinions out there right now that I am reading about. That wouldn't work same as a federal ban on any specific weapons or magazines. I'm still doing some research on how that works.

Are you saying that if Mrs. Lanza had been required to sign an afidavit of understanding about culpability with regard to negligence with an AR at time of purchase that she or any number of other parents would not secure those AR's? I'd imagine at least some would and that would reduce the incidence of white boys going postal. :0)

If I had a nutty kid or relative living in the house I would secure my AR (I don't so I often may not secure my weapons) as would any number of responsible gun owners, especially after some very public convictions and civil awards were national stories. Believe it or not many law abiding citizens do not murder people because capital punishment actually is a deterrent.

And if we apply the Patriot Act or NDAA 2012 on known terrorist groups here in America (GANGS) we would actually get some valid use out of those laws, clean up urban areas of crime beyond gun violence, and discourage gang affiliation so that young urban youths might actually finish school.

Invariably the govt. would abuse NDAA 2012 but it would be on some gang bangers hide and then the ACLU could step in and help correct that legislation to make it actually moral.

Frank,
Unfortunately we'll never know the answer to that. She knew her kid was a nutbag, but she took him shooting. Would she have NOT taken him to the range if she had to sign such an affidavit? Maybe, maybe not. Personally, I don't really see it as a viable solution, but I feel it's more constructive than some of the crap talk we are getting from politicians.

Mayor of Chicago with the toughest gun laws has the highest murder rate is talking some stupid nonsense wanting to go after manufacturers. That is absolutely idiotic. He can't even reduce crime in his city WITH gun bans.

Again, I say that the terrorist concept made at the federal level might make for difficult prosecution due to overlapping jurisdictions between state and federal court systems. One thing is certain, it would really help if each state vigorously enforced existing laws. Gun crimes are up and prosecutions are down. Like I said, plea bargains are not a deterrent. Instead of long prison terms, these morons are getting wrist slaps.

In Pennsylvania, where I live, it is illegal to text and drive with the penalties for causing an accident increasing if it is proved that you were doing so. Also, in Pennsylvania if an establishment over-serves a customer alcohol, said establishment can be held responsible if that person harms or kills another including but not limited to dui related accidents

"In Pennsylvania, where I live, it is illegal to text and drive with the penalties for causing an accident increasing if it is proved that you were doing so. Also, in Pennsylvania if an establishment over-serves a customer alcohol, said establishment can be held responsible if that person harms or kills another including but not limited to dui related accidents"

These solutions address the person misusing the item. The Piers Morgan solution would be to ban the type of car that was being driven.

Phil
I don't understand your point. Most states have the same or similar laws as you have in PA. How does that relate to the discussion? These laws make sense because texting while driving and drunk driving do kill people.

In the case of texting being ruled the proximate cause of injury or death to a third party, it make sense to punish the jerk that caused the accident. He or she broke the law and there is a criminal punishment. In the case of establishments that knowing serve an intoxicated person, it makes sense to take action against the establishment. In most states, however, that is a civil suit rather than a criminal action.

In both cases, they don't relate to what I was saying with respect to firearms. Too many of the "solutions" do more to be punishment to the law-abiding citizen, not the criminal. We have hundreds of unenforced gun laws on the books now. I fail to see how adding more laws that affect responsible gun owners more than the criminals does anything to reduce gun violence. The law-abiding citizens are not the problem, the law breakers are the problem. And now, there are ideas out there that involve going after the gun manufacturers. That makes about as much sense as going after Budweiser because some idiot drank a 12 pack then killed innocent people with his car.

Lanza tried to buy a gun prior to Sandy Hook and could not do so. The background check worked! So what did he do? He stole guns from his mother. How do you come up with a law that would have prevented that? Theft is already an illegal act. So what are the politicians and other anti-gunners doing? They are trying to put the blame somewhere so it can result in more useless laws to make them feel like the "have done something".

As a violent crime survivor, I fully support my rights under the second amendment. Over the years, I have had to use a firearm to defend myself twice. I have a CCW permit and have passed background checks to purchase all of my guns. I also used a firearm to prevent serious harm to a total stranger. People like me ARE NOT the problem, but we are being demonized as being the "crazies".

Until an anti-gunner has been in a life threatening situation with an armed nutbag, they shouldn't judge those of us that elect to be a survivor instead of a statistic.

Sorry for the additional rant not necessarily meant for you, but this entire argument is getting very old.

I don't want them banned or nationally registered. I gave two great options that would actually work to some greater or lesser extent and they weren't proffered a cures. I said reduce not eliminate. Negligent gun owners/parents should be held liable with regards to AR's and high capacity mags. It is a simple responsiblity. And gangs are terrorists and should be treated as such.

I feel your driving example is a straw man argument and that you didn't even read or digest my post. You dimissed the ideas w/o any real critique. Why?

Shawn. I don't think I would go so far as to say you have Storm Troopers in your society, but there are those who are advocating an armed citizen militia in the U.S. For what, to keep the federal governmment in line? What kind of thinking is that? What causes people to think that way? Do they really think bullets are going to cure all the problems? I said before that you have a very severe case of "Bullet Brain Syndrome" (BBS) which needs to be brought under control and sooner rather than later. It is costing too many lives, good lives, to keep this disease going.

Amazing, simply amazing. A tradgedy happens and you want a knee jerk reaction and attack gun owners and you can't understand why gun owners get deffensive? The fact of the matter is that "Assualt Style" weapons are used in violent crime less then ANY OTHER WEAPON. The FBI's reports prove it. less then 100 people last year. Handguns killed over 8,000 according to the FBI's reports. But its the AR-15, the weapon kept to maintain our rights, that is targeted, not handguns. That being the case you still think people are paranoid? Common sense gun laws means closing the missunderstood so called gun show loophole, and improving the background check system. Not registration, limitation and confiscation. Help the mentally ill and put security in the schools. The argument is made that the security officer may not be in the right place at the right time, but the people who commit these tragic killing usually kill themselves when the authorities arrive because they are cowards. So it stands to reason they would not take the chance if they knew they could be stopped. Also, Why does the media report so much on these people, thats what these psychopaths want! Thats why they kill children. The laws that are already in place would prevent alot of these problems, and Joe Biden has even said they can't even enforce the laws already on the books. Lets start enforceing the existing laws, stop giving these killers the legacy they want, and start helping the mentally ill that need it.

We as American people always try to cloud the truth, and get the issues confused . The Issue is were not trying to take away your rights to bear arms we are just trying to enforce our rights that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. And to be able to go to school to learn , and go into a mall and shop, and go to a theatre and watch a movie, and go to restaurant and eat without the threat of being shot multiple times trying to live and enjoy our lives

I think it is time we stop watching CNN and this Brit Peirs If car kills do you take it off the street, a ball can kill,
there is signs before this happens that no one stands up to. To watch CNN and support there station is supporting
the Brit. I think we need to start a band on CNN and see how that works. I for one after to night will be starting with facebook and twitter and more to band this site as bad for the USA.

Piers, I'm a gun owning, registered republican who appreciates your efforts to find a reasonable response to the question why any civilian would need to own an assault rifle or a high capacity magazine. I'm with you on this issue, there is no reason. Having these weapons in the hands of private citizens does not make me feel safer, quite the opposite in fact. To the people that would argue American citizens need to own guns because as Thomas Jefferson said, and I'm paraphrasing here, "it is not only our right but our responsibility to overthrow a government when said government has become oppresive" I would say, if it comes down to a firefight with the US military you're going to lose no matter how big your magazine is. If another Revolutionary War is necessary in our future (god forbid) our willingness to die for what we believe in is what will win the day, not how many bullets are in our weapons.

Post a comment

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.